Gettin out of the saddle

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by ClimbingBeast
Hey guys, quick question if u dont mind, im 17, 6'2 184 and have been riding for about 2 years now. I ride with a team of guys who are about 10-20 years older then me and are rockin the 2,500$ bikes and then theres me. When we ride on the flats I usually on the back praying that I wont loose the guy infront of me due to the fact that his wheel is whats keeping me alive. But when we hit a hill I'm always the one whos doing the leading, none of us can figure out why but on hills I can just rip up them(even the long ones =p) But just a quick question when I come out of the saddle Im leaning forward alot and I'm wondering if it would be better to keep my rear back a little more and my peddle stroke, Im kickin down and pulling up, almost snapping my heal at the bottom of my stroke. If you could get back to me that would be great, if not well that sucks Have a good one all.😄

Yeah. My advice is be thankful the problem's not the other way around.:p

Don't worry your body (sense of balance) will choose the correct lean angle based on your speed and the incline. However, you should strive for a smooth pedal rotation whether standing or seated. Less energy wasted.

If you were MTB then the front/back balance would be important for grip, otherwise it really doesn't mean much on the road.

I stay seated for climbs so i can use the pull in my hamies, standing uses a different muscle group so is good for a change.

Sounds like you enjoy hills, keep on

Brian

Do whatever works the best... Just try to keep a smooth stroke... If you waste less energy on the hills, maybe they won't be able to catch back up to you on the flats 😉

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by ClimbingBeast
Hey guys, quick question if u dont mind, im 17, 6'2 184 and have been riding for about 2 years now. I ride with a team of guys who are about 10-20 years older then me and are rockin the 2,500$ bikes and then theres me. When we ride on the flats I usually on the back praying that I wont loose the guy infront of me due to the fact that his wheel is whats keeping me alive. But when we hit a hill I'm always the one whos doing the leading, none of us can figure out why but on hills I can just rip up them(even the long ones =p) But just a quick question when I come out of the saddle Im leaning forward alot and I'm wondering if it would be better to keep my rear back a little more and my peddle stroke, Im kickin down and pulling up, almost snapping my heal at the bottom of my stroke. If you could get back to me that would be great, if not well that sucks Have a good one all.😄

Sounds like you've got plenty of strength (good power-to-weight ratio) for climbing. The older guys are probably beating you up on the flats with aerobic endurance; they run lower HRs and can cruise longer due to all the miles and seasons they've ridden. Just keep hanging on to the pack and you'll improve....as long as they let you suck wheels without taking your pull!

[QUOTE]Originally posted by ClimbingBeast
Hey guys, quick question if u dont mind, im 17, 6'2 184 and have been riding for about 2 years now. I ride with a team of guys who are about 10-20 years older then me and are rockin the 2,500$ bikes and then theres me. When we ride on the flats I usually on the back praying that I wont loose the guy infront of me due to the fact that his wheel is whats keeping me alive. But when we hit a hill I'm always the one whos doing the leading, none of us can figure out why but on hills I can just rip up them(even the long ones =p) But just a quick question when I come out of the saddle Im leaning forward alot and I'm wondering if it would be better to keep my rear back a little more and my peddle stroke, Im kickin down and pulling up, almost snapping my heal at the bottom of my stroke. If you could get back to me that would be great, if not well that sucks Have a good one all.😄 [/QUOTE

Hey ClimbingBeast

Good on ya because you haven't got the right height to weight ratio as you are knocking out at about 2.5! I am an oldie but I blow guys away on the hills, 5'10 150, but pay for it on the flat. Power to weight ratio rules, my preference is to stay in the saddle, has to kick over 10% to even think of standing up. Just keep a steady cadence and grind it out

Sean

If you want to try some thing on climbs when off the saddle I try to be back enough so when I rock the bike it touches either side of my inner thigh. Just a thought. It keeps me balance and even weight distribution.

sounds like the old guys a pretty smart....
in time you'll lose them on the flate too..... maybe...

im 178cm (5'10ish) and 120kg (280 odd)
I can roll along flats no probs but oh god them hiils 🙁
I would trade places anytime.
Style wise....smooth is good but if your whippin em up the just keep going 😄

I like to climb butt just off the saddle

... that should read, "when I really need the power, I climb butt just off the saddle".

... I don't really like it

... maybe I like it a bit

... maybe a bit more then a bit

....somebody hit me please...

What is generally a "good" height-to-weight ratio for cycling?

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by keydates
What is generally a "good" height-to-weight ratio for cycling?

The usual measure of overweightness is BMI which is (weight in kilogrm squared) divided by (height in centimetres) eg 60kg, 174cm has BMI of 60^2/174=20.7. This is because medical population studies have shown consistent relationship between that and goodhealth, diseases.

% Body fat is a closer relevance particularly for athletes and there isn't a close consistent relationship between bodyfat and BMI across people.

For TdF riders BMI varies between 19 and 23 from memory. Dave Cowie did a couple of studies where he published for Name, Height, Weight, BMI for example these riders:-

PANTANI Marco 1.72 56 18.9292
CASAGRANDE Francesco 1.72 64 21.6333
HAMILTON Tyler 1.72 67 22.6474
REBELLIN Davide 1.72 67 22.6474

Other studies have quoted BMI's for climbers at 19-20 or TTers/rouleurs at 22.

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by Michuel
The usual measure of overweightness is BMI which is (weight in kilogrm squared) divided by (height in centimetres) eg 60kg, 174cm has BMI of 60^2/174=20.7. This is because medical population studies have shown consistent relationship between that and goodhealth, diseases.

% Body fat is a closer relevance particularly for athletes and there isn't a close consistent relationship between bodyfat and BMI across people.

For TdF riders BMI varies between 19 and 23 from memory. Dave Cowie did a couple of studies where he published for Name, Height, Weight, BMI for example these riders:-


PANTANI Marco 1.72 56 18.9292
CASAGRANDE Francesco 1.72 64 21.6333
HAMILTON Tyler 1.72 67 22.6474
REBELLIN Davide 1.72 67 22.6474

Other studies have quoted BMI's for climbers at 19-20 or TTers/rouleurs at 22.

that formula doesn't make sense. so lance would have a BMI of 27? (70kg and 1.8meters) that's a lot higher than 20, and he is one of the best climbers.
there is a mistake in your formula. you say hamilton is 1.72meters and 67kg. 67^2/172=26.098 not 22.6474

Yes, the correct formula for BMI is weight/height in meters squared. So mine would be 60/1,7^2=20,76.

I guess my BMI is 19.51 then.

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by chr
Yes, the correct formula for BMI is weight/height in meters squared. So mine would be 60/1,7^2=20,76.

AFAIK there's no way to calculate BMI with such a simple formula. There are lots of parameters you loose.
Let a doctor measure that.

Francesco
--